Bombings in South-Thailand

[sunsnow]

Well,this is all over the news now...

Luckily (as horribly as it is to say that), seems that "only" three ppl dead thru so many bombs, over 20 bombs detonated! Maybe they didn't mean to try kill as many ppl as they can, these terrorists? The number of deaths is very small compared to the number of detonations...But try "just" cause general unrest. Anyway, awful. Afraid of Bali-revisited...Which by the way was on the news also yesterday because first sentenced criminals have been released.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,25689-2227004,00.html

At the end of this news clip, comes to my surprise information that over 1300 people has died after the uprising of 2004! :-O I knew about the big death toll in 2004 but didn't know that the total number is so high already. :-/

[MrUnicorn]

Maybe in being Thai Muslims they realize that if they killed a lot of people at 1 time the government wouldnt stand for it. So they kill many over a period of time, slowly. What do you think of that? I am neither Thai nor Muslim, so I have no idea...its just a guess.

It does bring into light that they are not just at war with Christianity, but with everyone. Its a shame, will the day some when we have to kill them all to save ourselves?

[frankenburner2]

Maybe in being Thai Muslims they realize that if they killed a lot of people at 1 time the government wouldnt stand for it. So they kill many over a period of time, slowly. What do you think of that? I am neither Thai nor Muslim, so I have no idea...its just a guess.

It does bring into light that they are not just at war with Christianity, but with everyone. Its a shame, will the day some when we have to kill them all to save ourselves?

Mr. Bush? is that you?

[vbroker]

"It does bring into light that they are not just at war with Christianity, but with everyone."

Wow. This is the first lucid comment I've seen posted here. I suppose there are others since I haven't been through all the threads.

"Its a shame, will the day some(sic) when we have to kill them all to save ourselves?"

There are many and many who post here who believe it is the West's (especially America's) fault for much of society's ills as well as the cause for all the terrorism. That is the biggest shame. Western geopolitical trends, policies, the move toward global trade and somehow we the infidels are responsible and required to make amends. Then and only then, of course, will all the disparity, despair and thus the terrorism stop. Astounding thinking.

"Mr. Bush? is that you?"

Nope. But don't look now....his ratings are up. Like a quality company's management unafraid of executing and sticking with long term and possibly unpopular yet correct strategic decisions benefits its stock price and therefore its shareholders. Yeah I know it's still just 40%. I believe it goes higher still.

[frankenburner2]

I doubt a muslim from the south of thailand would know a christian if he sat on one.

People blaming america is the "biggest" shame? and there you are pretending to know what the word lucid means.

Bush's ratings are up to 40% approval?...so..only a 180 million or so disapprove....i suppose that ain't bad.....so long as they keep making money!

[vbroker]

Concerning Halliburton symbol HAL on the NYSE:

22 July 2002 HAL trading around $10.25.

15 June 2006 HAL closed $74.34.

FYI, Richard Cheney was HAL's Chairman and CEO before he became Vice President Cheney. Also before he became vice president he divested himself entirely of his HAL holdings. All of this was before 2000 in case you forgot. I would say the company since then made some decent strategic, long term decisions, wouldn't you? And their shareholders did quite well as a result. More than 7x their money in under 4 years. Oh and I wasn't aware "making money" was a bad thing. Sorry ladies; I only deal in the facts.

[Loburt]

Made decent strategic, long-term decisions?

Or benefitted unfairly from sweet-heart deals based on the company's relationship with the Vice President?

Selected facts can be presented.

They don't always add up to the reality.

[beej]

Isreal, Somalia, Iraq, SriLanka, Nepal, Kashmir, Afganistan, Thailand, and the others, its sad but atleast we can gain some heart from the relative peace in Northern Ireland, and Spain, both ETA and the IRA have called it a day for now.

People have been killing each other for years, in most cases its driven by $$$ just sad to see it happen, and the innocent people that loose thier lives.

******* Independant state in Pattani!! come on! Whats that all about!!!

[vbroker]

Education time. ALL businesses base part of their success on the relationships they have with others (customers, the workforce, their community, the government, etc.). After all, if not for these relationships, there is no business. It's called goodwill. "Accountants record this in the financial report; goodwill arises when more was paid for the business than you'd expect from just looking at the value of its assets and liabilities" (dictionary.com). Some would look at this company's relationship with the White House and suggest they have somehow "benefitted unfairly" although no laws were broken. I choose to view it as a former CEO knows his prior company's abilility to do a particular job in a given circumstance. At worst, he is biased (so what...aren't we all?) favorably to that company; this does not change that many of HAL's competitors bid on these same contracts. Think about it; if the competitors did not or were not allowed, the press would have rightly been all over it. Every business is expected to always maximize and leverage legally all of its opportunities. That is called competitive advantage; not illegal advantage.

So we have two different "realities" based on the same facts. Hmmm...I wonder which one several million of the company's shareholders would be apt to agree with? Class dismissed.

[Loburt]

Shareholders are usually not unbiased or disinterested parties. Their interest is personal profit. Nothing wrong with having an interest in your personal profit (as long as you're not hurting others or commiting dishonest acts to achieve it), but that makes them the least qualified to judge whether the company's contracts were fair. Would the shareholders of the competing corporations agree with Halliburton's shareholders? Not likely.

While relationships play a part in business, that doesn't make all relationships proper, ethical or the business that results from them in the best interests of the public. And when we're dealing with government awarded contracts, public interest is a factor.

You can call it goodwill if you like. Other people call it corruption, cronyism and conflict of interest, based upon the particular relationship.

I'm not sure what competitive bidding you're talking about, but the government has been roundly criticized for awarding Halliburton contracts in Iraq with no competitive bidding.

Concerning Halliburton, or HAL on the NYSE, Fortune magazine did report last year that many of the allegations about the company, its relationship with Vice President Cheney and its business in Iraq were either untrue or unproven - which is not exactly an exoneration.

However, in examining Halliburton's overall business, this is what the magazine had to say:

"In an age of ugly symbols, a handful of companies have come to serve as shorthand for what's wrong with corporate America. In 2004, Halliburton moved to the top of the roster."

This did not appear in Mother Jones. It appeared in Fortune magazine.

[Loburt]

f*cking Independant state in Pattani!! come on! Whats that all about!!!

It's about the fact that it once was an independent state until about a hundred years ago when the Thais invaded, took it over and sent its sultan up north to die in a Thai jail.

It's about decades of brutal oppression, cultrural suppression and economic exploitation by Thai Buddhist military, police and bureaucrats over the Malay Muslim majority in those areas.

It's about schools refusing to teach you your own people's history, and so finding the information from more radical sources.

It's about soldiers bringing dogs into Mosques.

It's about decades of the government assassinating moderate Muslim leaders while making deals with godfathers and gangsters to run the place.

It's about it being the poorest area in the country, despite having plenty of natural resources.

It's about soldiers and police abducting local Muslims and taking them out and killing them on a regular basis.

It's about Thaksin's War on Drugs, in which hundreds of Muslim young men were murdered by government hit squads. And as we know, many people murdered in the War on Drugs had no involvement with drugs. And with Thaksin's government controlling all the television stations, many Muslims weren't aware that the War's abuses were as severe in other parts of the country also. They interpreted it as a government campaign to kill Muslim youth. And considering the government's violent history in their area, it made sense to them.

This is not the entire story of what's going on in the South, nor an endorsement of an independent Pattani or the violence being perpetrated by various groups down there.

It is, however, the prism through which many people down there see the situation.

[rafval]

who knows whats happening there, maybe the people that live there but with media cencorship in thailand no one else does, its has to be devious tho or the government wouldnt be covering it up

[vbroker]

What media censorship? You haven't been censored, have you? The Forum Moderator appears to have accessed information to have posted his opinion on the Pattani matter. Unless you start needlessly calling people unwarranted names here you can say whatever you want regardless of how stupid and/or incorrect it is. And there is no shortage of stupidity in these forums; believe me. Have you been into any of the hundreds of packed internet cafes all over Thailand? In other words, the internet is freely available to anyone who chooses to access it. If the BBC or Bangkok Post isn't carrying it you can certainly find information online; about anything. My guess is they already have; check their respective websites. You will be surprised by what you find. That is not to say you should just believe everything you see, read and hear at face value. If you choose to remain ignorant, that is your problem. The information is there if you want it. Why don't you type "Pattani" into any of the online portals (Google, Yahoo, MSN, Ask, etc.) and see if you don't come up with too much information. I did. There are 1.73 million links with the word "Pattani" referenced in Google alone. My assumption now is I know more than you do about the subject simply because I invested 10-15 minutes reading about it. I never heard of Pattani before this post. There is no "devious government coverup" because it's too difficult if not impossible to do nowadays. You conspiracy theorists make me laugh. Wake up.

[Loburt]

The Forum Moderator didn't access his information about Pattani through Google or the local news media. The Forum Moderator accessed his information by being there, among other methods.

You're both right and wrong.

Anyone with access to the internet can find a tremendous amount of information about Pattani and the situation in Southern Thailand. That includes people in Thailand (although some of the more radical sites are blocked by the Thai police). For an outsider to try and sort through what's accurate and what isn't, however, can sometimes be tricky.

But the truth is that the vast majority of people in Thailand don't access the internet. (or English-language newspapers, where some good info has been published) TF is not a representative sample. Most are rural peple whose one source of news is free television.

Free television is handled by concessions doled out by the government or the army. Consequently, news content on free television is almost never critical of the government or the army, and essentially presents the Central Thai view of events. The viewpoints of minorities and other groups are almost never presented.

I wouldn't say, however, that there is any vast government cover up in this situation. There is a lot of confusion and disagreement among various elements of the government as to exactly what's going on down there and what is the best way to handle it.

But of course free television doesn't give much if any coverage to abuses committed by government forces in the south, or the long-running abuses and exploitation in the area. Consequently, a lot of people here really don't know.

[rafval]

you wont get any access to sites on separatism in the south on the internet in thailand I suspect, and when you combine that polititians saying the violence is merely a diversion for drug runners, not to mention taksin saying he didnt want the issue discussed by the public, it does seem a little suspicious, but I dont know, all I know is that I have read so many conflicting stories that I havent been able to reach any conclusion on whats really happining there

[beej]

I'd kinda like to go photograph whats been going on down there, I doubt its too dangerous, but it would be interesting to see first hand whats up.

[zeusbheld]

What media censorship?

while thailand clearly isn't china, the government can (and sometimes does) censor the media in thailand. DUH.

And there is no shortage of stupidity in these forums; believe me.

thanks for providing much, much more than your share. your'e a real team player aren't you?

The information is there if you want it. Why don't you type "news censorship thailand" into any of the online portals (Google, Yahoo, MSN, Ask, etc.) and see if you don't come up with too much information. I did. There are 948,000 links with the words "news censorship thailand" referenced in Google alone. My assumption now is I know more than you do about the subject simply because I invested 10-15 minutes reading about it.

here let me save you some time:

there was that pesky little decree last summer, which contained a rider allowing the government to censor anything that might "adversely affect state security, peace or public morality."

and here's an opinion piece by shawn w. crispin, the former bangkok bureau chief for the Far Eastern Economic Review.

by the way, i was aware of censorship in thailand before you pulled that post out of your ass, anne. film is 'media' isn't it? if as a foreigner you shoot in thailand, the script has to go before a censorship review. i have first-hand awareness of this (that makes me a primary source doesn't it.)

There is no "devious government coverup" because it's too difficult if not impossible to do nowadays. You conspiracy theorists make me laugh. Wake up.

correct in that, nobody covered it up, it was controversial and in broad daylight. although now that the thai government is in free fall i wonder what the situation is.

wow, that's rare--we (sort of) agree on conspiracy theorists---you have a stronger stomach than i; conspiracy theorists make me puke violently (refer to the "debunking the debunker" thread regarding 9/11).

by the way, have you heard the claims that the entire news media in the united states is a left-wing conspiracy? wonder how much cheap crack had to be smoked to come up with that one?

[zeusbheld]

who knows whats happening there, maybe the people that live there but with media cencorship in thailand no one else does, its has to be devious tho or the government wouldnt be covering it up

hmmmm let's see if i got this.

1) information from the south is incomplete.

2) the government has some limited power of censorship in thailand and may be filtering information and/or pressuring the media toward their point of view.

which obviously leads you to the conclusion:

" its has to be devious tho or the government wouldnt be covering it up"

whaaaaaaaat???

that's the beauty of conspiracy theories isn't it--if anyone's skeptical, or wants them to be supported by things like facts and evidence, that means the government "got to them."

[sunsnow]

They did it again.

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

More ponderings on Thailands terrorist situation? Any thai/farang local analysis?

How much is this anymore "just criminals fighting against eachothers" as some times the police/government has issued? (Similar to Russia where no doubtly mafia sets things among each others "straight" with bombs)

Is there any news some organizations taking responsibility for these actions at all (Now or in previous attacks)? I don't doubt that some of the things have been "just" organized crime as also BBC mentions, but this? 22 bombs all over and inside banks?

When organized crime bombs something, they make a bomb, and blow one place, maybe a shop. (just "gut feeling" here, can't say what is MO for "normal" mafia but thats what it looks like when Russian mafia makes hits)

And in addition here, "only" two deaths, still remebering those previous bomb series where I think no one died? Motives? Motives? AND these are clearly (??) 1) not meant to kill as many as possible and just create confusion/aim to accomplish some political or criminal objectives (because 22 bombs and this kind of small kill ratio is probably intentional) or 2) the bomb makers just "suck" at their "profession" (this I doubt, the bombings are said to be "simultanious" requiring quite much planning etc)?? It is just purely amazing that so few people have died. Maybe they are using low yield bombs on purpose, to kill a few, but not maximium amount. Gosh, horrible stuff. Oh, and this sounds damn sophisticated attack:

"The homemade bombs, which were triggered by mobile phone signals, were placed in garbage bins, at newspaper stands and near seats where customers wait for service in the banks in Yala province, said Maj. Gen"

What could be the solution for this internal crisis in Thailand? The upcoming confusion around elections probably just ups the crisis in south too, terrorists (?) using the situation for their own good and purpose.

Quality coverage (imho) from BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5250322.stm

And let's keep the US out of this thread.

[Loburt]

It's possible seperatists did this, and maybe even one of the gangs vying for power over the area.

But don't rule out the possiblity that army or police officers loyal to Thaksin did this.

With the military reshuffle coming up next month, there ar tensions going on right now over who will hold what posts and where there loyalties will lie.

For quite a while, Thaksin had been successful in putting his classmates and loyalist into key positions in the army.

Recently coup rumors were flying around Bangkok.

Then Chief Privy Councillor Prem Tinsulanonda, a former Prime Minister and army commander in chief, made a speech before graduating cadets telling them where their loyalties should lie. Governments come and go, he said.

A few days later, several officers who were loyal to Thaksin and commanded units around Bangkok were transferred to the boondocks.

Earlier this year when the street protets against Thaksin were at their height, Army Commander in Chief Gen. Sonthi Boonyaratkalin, after a meeting with Thaksin, made it clear he did not want the military to intervene in any way. Word was that officers loyal to Thaksin wanted to.

After the supposed attempt to kill Thaksin with a car bomb last week, (which most people in Bangkok think was a hoax organized by Thaksin himself) papers reported that Thaksin was pressuring Sonthi to once again appoint officers loyal to himself to key positions in the upcoming reshuffle. Sonthi is reportedly resisting.

Thaksin has also assigned Sonthi, who is Muslim, to personally oversee the situation in the south. The bombings make Sonthi look bad.

It weakens him and gives Thaksin more leverage in pressuring him to appoint his classmates and loyalists.

Dont' be surprised if there is an even worse incident in the next few weeks. And notice now that the police have said no street protests will be allowed now that the election campaign period has started.

I'm not saying this is definitely what is behind these latest bombings.

But I wouldn't completelydiscount it.

[sunsnow]

So efficient terrorists know that many minor attacks with relatively few deaths are both more effective at spreading terror and easier to manage.

Oh, I did not see this. Sounds good point.

The terrorists act in the name of Islam, and Islam flourishes best in poverty and ignorance.

To correct this a bit, better to say (which I think you mean): extremist Islam is what especially gets it's "kicks" out of this, not "general" Islam.

Because saying that Islam itself flourishes from these conditions is true in a way that most religions give future and hope for people in need, from buddhism to also Jesus promised better life to poor, not for the rich. But in Islamistic terrorists case (as in any group that uses religion as their "shroud" or "hiding place"), poverty is a good breeding ground more future extremists.

And what I noticed also in the BBC article I posted: look at the casualtie numbers in deep south: 2/3 are muslims who have died...:-S "oh yee with little faith" and so on and so on :-(

[CiaranM]

The terrorists act in the name of Islam, and Islam flourishes best in poverty and ignorance.

all religons tend to flourish best in poverty and ignorance !!!

[Angel_Master]

"It does bring into light that they are not just at war with Christianity, but with everyone."

Wow. This is the first lucid comment I've seen posted here. I suppose there are others since I haven't been through all the threads.

"Its a shame, will the day some(sic) when we have to kill them all to save ourselves?"

There are many and many who post here who believe it is the West's (especially America's) fault for much of society's ills as well as the cause for all the terrorism. That is the biggest shame. Western geopolitical trends, policies, the move toward global trade and somehow we the infidels are responsible and required to make amends. Then and only then, of course, will all the disparity, despair and thus the terrorism stop. Astounding thinking.

"Mr. Bush? is that you?"

Nope. But don't look now....his ratings are up. Like a quality company's management unafraid of executing and sticking with long term and possibly unpopular yet correct strategic decisions benefits its stock price and therefore its shareholders. Yeah I know it's still just 40%. I believe it goes higher still.

So someone is only "lucid' if they make a comment that you agree with. :roll:

Do you know any Muslims? I suppose you do, and you believe they should be lined up against a wall and shot for supporting ?dangerous ideologies?.

Their only conceivable crime could be being born into what you consider to be a wrong culture. So they are human trash. I think we have a couple of mad men in our midst. Interesting they are Bush supporters.

I am very interested to see the proliferation of websites that are making some very compelling cases regarding the 9/11 Commission Report being a huge cover-up and 9/11 being an inside job cared out so that longstanding policy objectives could be pushed though. I am waiting to see how at least history will remember this, if not much of it being forced into the mainstream by the shear numbers of those asking unanswered questions in the not so distant future.

How long can they support that house of cards? It is a long and very slippery slope I believe. Wait and see.

[Loburt]

We already had a thread about the 9-11 conspiracy theories, and a link was posted to a very well-researched technical article in of all places Popular Mechanics that explained and debunked much of what the conspiracy theorists claimed.

Of course, for someone who can't distinguish neo-Nazi propaganda from reality, I'm sure the facts won't make a difference.

[GoldMember]

"Mr. Bush? is that you?"

Nope. But don't look now....his ratings are up. Like a quality company's management unafraid of executing and sticking with long term and possibly unpopular yet correct strategic decisions benefits its stock price and therefore its shareholders. Yeah I know it's still just 40%. I believe it goes higher still.

If Bush inc is quality management then Enron are Berkshire Hathaway.